[Styparty]

http://news.yahoo.com/six-strikes-yo...144559247.html

Starting July 1, the nation’s largest Internet service providers (ISPs) have agreed to adopt a “Graduated Response” program intended to cut down on illegal file sharing. The program, colloquially known as the “six-strikes” system, is the brainchild of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) — the same industry groups that conjured up SOPA and PIPA. The system will affect millions of Internet users across the country. Whether you download your music and movies from the Internet or not, it is important for everyone to understand what the plan is, and how it could affect your life. Here is everything you need to know about “six-strikes.”

How does it work, in a nutshell?Anytime copyright holders find that their content is being illegally downloaded, they will contact the participating ISPs. The ISPs will then send out an initial “copyright alert” to accounts linked to the alleged infringement. If a subscriber’s account continues to be linked to infringement, his or her ISP will send out up to four written notices, the natures of which are sometimes vague and varying. If the alleged infringement continues still, the ISP will then take “mitigation measures,” which include bandwidth throttling (i.e. slowing down the accused subscriber’s connection), or even temporarily cutting off full Web browsing abilities. In cases where alleged infringement persists after the initial mitigation measure, the subscriber may face lawsuits from the copyright holder, and/or have theirInternet access cut entirely, in accordance with section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act(DCMA).

Who is in charge of this system?Administering “six strikes” is a new entity called the Center for Copyright Information (CCI), which was established by the entertainment industry and the ISP industry. (Internet users were not part of the negotiations.) The CCI will be governed by a six-person executive committee, made up of three representatives of the copyright industry, and three representatives of participating Internet service providers. There will also be a three-person advisory board, made up of people “from relevant subject matter and consumer interest communities,” who represent us, the Internet users, in all this. Though, from the looks of it, the advisory committee appears to be mostly ornamental.

The CCI develops the “educational material” part of the alerts, and develops a set of “best practices” for the copyright alerts system to abide by. According to the CCI’s FAQs, the CCI will also “benefit from guidance by consumer advocates and technical experts serving on its advisory committee or providing other expert services,” whatever that means.

Which ISPs are part of this plan?The big ones. Those currently on board include AT&T, Cablevison, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, and Verizon. Smaller, local ISPs are not yet included in the plan. But more may climb aboard by the time the plan sets sail this summer.

What are these alerts?Officially, the plan contains six levels of “copyright alerts,” and the consequences at each depth intensify. They are as follows:

First alert: An ISP will send a written alert (probably via email), which informs the subscriber that his/her account has been linked to infringing activities. This alert will also direct the subscriber to “educational resources” which will “(i) help him/her to check the security of his/her computer and any Wifi network, (ii) provide explanatory steps which will help to avoid content theft in the future and (iii) provide information about the abundant sources of lawful music, film and TV content,”according to the CCI. Of course, all of these “educational resources” are provided by the entertainment industry and their ISP cohorts, so you can guess what kind of advice these one-sided resources provide.

Second alert: This alert nearly mimics the first, but will “underscore the educational messages.” Also, ISPs may choose to simply skip this alert, and jump to option number three.

Third alert: At this level, things get creepy. Once an account is linked to infringing behavior a third time, the ISP will issue the alert through a “conspicuous mechanism,” like a pop-up window or landing screen, when the user goes online. The user must then explicitly acknowledge that he/she has seen the alert, which reminds that “content theft” is taking place through his/her account, and re-informs him/her the consequences of illegally downloading copyrighted content.Fourth alert: The fourth alert is essentially identical to the third alert.

Fifth alert: Now the “mitigation measures” begin. In addition to sending an alert (probably the same alert as the third and fourth alerts), the ISP can choose to a) reduce Internet connection speeds (i.e. throttling); b) impose a landing page, which the accused subscriber cannot bypass until he/she contacts the ISP “to discuss the matter” — or reviews and responds to more of that enlightening “educational material.” According to the agreement, the ISPs have some freedom to choose which mitigation measures to take at this point in the alert process. And these measures may include some that are not listed here.Sixth alert: At this point, the ISP may issue another mitigation measure. But the company could, legally, suspend the customer’s account altogether — though that is not an official part of the plan. Also, the subscriber could be sued by the copyright holders under DCMA. That said, the specific consequences at this stage remain dangerously unclear. (We’re putting our money on lawsuits.) The CCI does not expect many subscribers to reach this level of alert.Is this the same as the “three strikes” laws overseas?No. First, this plan is not a law at all. It is a voluntary agreement between copyright holders and ISPs. Second, this plan does not mandate that ISPs completely cut subscribers’ Internet access, as is the case with so-called “three strikes” laws. Moreover, the plan does not even include a temporary suspension of Internet access — unless, of course, you consider an impassable landing page a suspension of Internet access.
Who decides to send out these alerts? Seems like a terrible idea. More in article.

[RarensussyRen]

I'm looking forward to the lawsuits that arise from all the people being wrongly accused. And don't say it won't happen; with absolutely no governmental oversight, this system is just asking for abuse. There's already antitrust concerns.

[ttoothh]

I very much doubt that the ISP's would actually do much because at the end of the day they want your money so they aren't going to want to lose loads of customers by throttling connections or even disabling accounts.

[GenManagerS]

Just use TOR and don't worry about it.

It kills me that they even bother doing this. People that know what they are doing are still going to download this stuff in ways that can't be watched.

[CULTDIAMONDS]

UK government is planning draconian measures as well, akin to the FBI's methods of snooping on communications data - something they were adamantly against when they weren't in power [rofl]

[Narcodran]

UK government is planning draconian measures as well, akin to the FBI's methods of snooping on communications data - something they were adamantly against when they weren't in power [rofl]

Yeah, but to me with nothing to hide, I don't really care. As long as it actually does something good.

[68AttendGem]

Yeah, but to me with nothing to hide, I don't really care. As long as it actually does something good.

How do you think we find and arrest suspected terrorists as it is? This is not going to help against terrorism, or necessarily do much in the way of good.

Those who get caught are because they're stupid. They'd get caught with or without this bill. The clever ones know how to encrypt their traffic and aren't retarded enough to get caught. Luckily, there are so few of those.

So, how does this help, exactly?

[NodePark]

so these 'three strikes' laws are already present in UK? any of you UK guys had any experiences with that?

[Sironimoll]

I feel like Al Swearengen, standing on my balcony watching the cocksuckers try to manipulate and control the world that I helped make.



(Guess which show I've been watching lately?)

[wMceqj7F]

I feel like Al Swearengen, standing on my balcony watching the cocksuckers try to manipulate and control the world that I helped make.



(Guess which show I've been watching lately?)

yeah, well, don't mess with them or you will look like Al Swearengen after he fights the sheriff.

[Imihooniump]

I think more of a scare tactic. They already do this and have a warning system in place. Shoot, even within torrent programs you can choose to only download and send out encrypted transfers so all they can read is metadata. This is how users get around comcasts throttling without needing proxys or netowrks like tor.


I'll find it when on desktop, but in France pirating dropped by like a half and music/movie sales still dropped some 3%.

[Gubocang]

I think more of a scare tactic. They already do this and have a warning system in place. They do not do this, there is no similar system currently in place. Which is why they are implementing it...

Shoot, even within torrent programs you can choose to only download Technically, downloading is also illegal. AFAIK, nobody has ever gotten sued for downloading, but under this new system, there is nothing to stop you from getting a strike for downloading copyrighted material.

and send out encrypted transfers so all they can read is metadata This is irrelevant. If your IP address is detected in the torrent swarm, there is nothing stopping a 3rd party to log it and report it to an ISP for a strike. This is how the copyright lawsuits have historically worked: your IP address, if found in a torrent swarm, is logged by a 3rd party on behalf of the RIAA/MPAA, and a subpoena is issued to the ISP to find the account holder. Encrypting your torrent uploads has no effect here.

This is how users get around comcasts throttling without needing proxys or netowrks like tor. Comcast no longer targets torrent traffic specifically for throttling. Comcast will throttle heavy users who are on congested nodes as a basic network management practice, which will affect any traffic of that user, not just bit torrent (and the practice affects less than 10% of Comcast users). So no, nobody is getting around Comcast's throttling.

I'll find it when on desktop, but in France pirating dropped by like a half and music/movie sales still dropped some 3%. I believe you're referring to this story. I find Hadopi's analysis flawed, but it is still interesting (and not at all surprising) that a supposed drop in piracy does not equate to a similar rise in music sales, and in fact music sales still declined.To me this means that either piracy did not decline as much as they are claiming, or even if it did, people are still unwilling to buy crappy music.

[FourEsters]

How do you think we find and arrest suspected terrorists as it is? This is not going to help against terrorism, or necessarily do much in the way of good.

Those who get caught are because they're stupid. They'd get caught with or without this bill. The clever ones know how to encrypt their traffic and aren't retarded enough to get caught. Luckily, there are so few of those.

So, how does this help, exactly?

Shhhh lol.

[qilmuz6v]

How do you think we find and arrest suspected terrorists as it is? This is not going to help against terrorism, or necessarily do much in the way of good.

Those who get caught are because they're stupid. They'd get caught with or without this bill. The clever ones know how to encrypt their traffic and aren't retarded enough to get caught. Luckily, there are so few of those.

So, how does this help, exactly?

Woooooooow I didn't say it was going to stop the next 9/11. I can imagine it would definitely prevent or catch some people.

[viagra_generic]

They do not do this, there is no similar system currently in place. Which is why they are implementing it...

Yes there is. If all that is going on here is swarm checking/reporting by a 3rd party, I know for a fact then that this has been going on for at least 6 years. I got an email about copyright bs 6 years ago and between then and now, I know a lot of people who have gotten emails about copyright infringement. Either stop or your service will be cut.

It is already and has been going on. Just a scare tactic in my book until a massive amount of more emails get sent out by the ISPs and people do start getting axed by their provider. Though, this could just end up being a gold rush for smaller ISPs, and even large ones, whom could give 2 flips about it.

MPAA/RIAA could be giving out enough money to large ISPs where they can lose customers, but if those smaller and even large ISPs aren't getting any money, the $$ signs will be coming from the customers.

[tigoCeree]

Yes there is. If all that is going on here is swarm checking/reporting by a 3rd party, I know for a fact then that this has been going on for at least 6 years. I got an email about copyright bs 6 years ago and between then and now, I know a lot of people who have gotten emails about copyright infringement. Either stop or your service will be cut.

It is already and has been going on. Just a scare tactic in my book until a massive amount of more emails get sent out by the ISPs and people do start getting axed by their provider. Though, this could just end up being a gold rush for smaller ISPs, and even large ones, whom could give 2 flips about it.

MPAA/RIAA could be giving out enough money to large ISPs where they can lose customers, but if those smaller and even large ISPs aren't getting any money, the $$ signs will be coming from the customers.

Nope. No there is not. Just because you've gotten an email about copyright in the past doesn't make this the same system. If it was the same, there wouldn't be a need to implement this new system, would there?

The new system is also less about "scare tactics" and more about "education". What's scarier: being slapped with a civil suit for torrenting the latest movie, or getting an email "strike" and asking you to read some material about why infringement is bad?

In that sense, the new policy seems fairly reasonable. My problem with it is that it can be abused very easily and I see many many people being wrongly accused. Guilty until proven innocent, basically.

[Rurcextedutty]

The execution is changing, and trying to go with a more unified system, but yes there already has been a system in place. If there was no system now, no one would already be getting emails.

Just the system is being modified, upgraded and trying to make it universal amoung all ISPs.

The entertainment industry seems to be giving a little more slack now. Changing up to "education" at first but that might be because they usually have a hard time with lawsuits. And it nevered seemed like a lot of people were being prosecuted anyways.